Request for opinions

[fabrisse]

My dad teaches American government at a community college in Los Angeles. Every semester he takes several topics and uses them for graded class discussions. Part of the process is giving the students a week or two in advance links and/or papers they should look at in order to know more about the topic.

For the first time, in the wake of Newtown, he's including gun control as a topic.

I will over the next couple of weeks ask some of you individually whether you would be willing to post publicly or write up an opinion that could be circulated to these students on some of the topics. Any of you who has a public posting on gun control or one of the related topics I'm going to list below, please let me know so that I can gather the link.

I WILL NOT TRY TO CIRCUMVENT ANYONE'S PRIVACY SETTINGS. If you're not interested in speaking publicly or circulating a paper privately, that's fine by me.

If anyone knows anything about things like extra large magazines or specialty weapons and ammo -- and how they are or aren't regulated in some jurisdictions, that would be great.

I've already given Dad some heads-up links to data about gun ownership versus gun crime world wide and gun crime statistics vis-a-vis jurisdictions with the death penalty.

Extra Topics:

Mental health and how health insurance covers preventive treatment for mental health (can be treated as one topic or linked together)

Videogames: the difference between first person shooters and other types of games.

Comments

[bimmer1200.livejournal.com]

Undauntra pointed me this way. This is an issue I'm extremely passionate about.

I do not use the phrase 'gun control'. What is being discussed is not just the restriction of guns, but of the right to self-defense. I support the right of self-defense for moral reasons, factual reasons, and historical reasons.

First, the moral argument for private firearms ownership. Firearms are tools that protect life. Firearms enable the weak to defend themselves from the strong who would prefer to use force to gain their desire. They also provide a bulwark against government tyranny. An armed populace is not easily cowed. For anyone fully educated on the data, there's really little question as to the efficacy of firearms at reducing violent crime. The desire to deprive people of the basic liberty to defend themselves and their property is morally corrupt.

Which brings us to the factual. Compare the Brady Campaign's list of the 'best' (read strictest) locations for depriving people of the right to self-defense and the list of the states and locales with the highest violent crime rates. There's a strong correlation. To go further afield, the most comprehensive review of studies of gun ownership versus gun violence is a survey study published by Harvard Law: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf. Counter to the expectations of the researchers going into it, they concluded that higher densities of gun ownership correlate with lower incidence of gun violence. Chart out the decline in violent crime that has occurred since the 70s with the relaxing of restrictions on private firearm ownership and again we see a correlation. The fact is, more guns equals more safety.

The 2nd Amendment protects the individual right to keep and bare arms. Just as the 1st protects freedom of speech and of associaton and of religion. The Founding fathers believed in this right and up until the civil war, the restrictions (or rather, their lack) would horrify most. Most cannon were privately owned, up to and including naval cannon. Cannon were the weapons of mass destruction of their day and the destruction a cannon could wreak is only comparable to mortar and high explosives. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting. It's about exercising the gun to defend life and property against criminals and against the government if it should come to that.

Further, the roots of most gun control laws go back to the Jim Crow era. They started out as a way to keep blacks powerless. Gun registration and confiscation of also historically been prelude to fascist gov't control. it's much easier to send around jack-booted thugs if the populace is unarmed.

Another reason for my opposition to restricting further the right to self-defense is philosophical. Most proponents of those restrictions are hoplophobes who know little about firearms. The assault weapons ban that has been discussed of late is a perfect example. The phrase 'assault weapon' is a misnomer. It basically means the gun looks scary and is the result of confusing the political phrase created for the legislation with actual assault rifles. Which is another point where most hoplophobes are often confused and that is the difference between automatic weapons (which are effectively illegal) and semi-automatic weapons.

[bimmer1200.livejournal.com]

Replying to myself to complete my comments:

With that, I'll segue into answering your question about magazines and specialty weapons and regulations. There are, essentially two sets of gun laws in the US. Federal law and state law. Federal law applies everywhere and sets the 'base'. Prohibitions on felons, the mentally ill and the like are federal. The required background check before buying a handgun is a federal law. The near-illegality of select fire automatic weapons is a federal law. I say near-illegality because it -is- possible to own a fully automatic select-fire weapon. But it requires months of background checks with the ATF and local LEOs as well as thousands of dollars per firearm. Same goes for suppressors, though the requirements aren't as onerous from a monetary standpoint. Further, you cannot sell firearms to someone without an FFL across state lines. There are federal restrictions on barrel length for long arms (they have to be over a certain size so they are difficult to conceal). There are also age restrictions. 18 for long arms, and 21 for handguns, I believe. Straw purchases are illegal.

From there, laws vary by state. From the highly restrictive ordinances in Chicago and DC that make it virtually impossible to own a handgun legally and difficult to own long guns to the more permissive states that have shall issue conceal carry permits. States like CT for instance have not only the federal requirements, but also require gun registration and a 3 day waiting period. the so-called 'gun show loophole' is non-existent. The vendors at gun shows have to follow the same laws as a free-standing gun shop. Different states restrict different types of ammunition and high capacity magazines. http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0217.htm is a good summary. But high capacity mags are a non-issue. They jam overwhelmingly more often and aren't a factor in assaults by maniacs for that reason. Some states have CCW reciprocity agreements with other states, some don't even if they have CCW permits. Also, some have shall issue CCWs instead of may issue. That is, shall issue means that if you meet the basic requirements which are usually gun safety classes, training, a higher burden of liability and passing the background check, the sheriff must issue the CCW. May issue means the sheriff can tell you go pound sand for any reason or none.

On a side note, http://www.businessinsider.com/is-mass-murder-on-the-rise-2012-7 has an excerpt that indicates that mass murder is not on the rise. In fact, the same expert was on NPR last week and mentioned that the number of these incidents per year and the number of deaths are about the same for the last four decades. There is some evidence that once the attackers are confronted by armed responders they either suicide or surrender. As for the question of the efficacy of civilians stopping these rampages and the numbers indicate that waiting for the cops costs about 6x as many lives as if there's an armed civilian able to respond: http://silverunderground.com/2012/07/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/

[fabrisse.livejournal.com]

Thank you so much for such a thoughtful and comprehensive case. I appreciate the links more than I can say. I'll let my father use this entry on my LJ, and your responses, as one of the resources.

I'm glad undauntra pointed you here.

[bimmer1200.livejournal.com]

You're welcome. I've got another link that is, I think, more comprehensive and from someone with far more knowledge than I. Aside from Larry being one of my favorite authors, he's an expert (as he details in the essay). I think it might be useful for your father's class and it is likely far better written than anything I could say:

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/